NE: Hunt on for "cruel man" who shot and hurt family's pet dog that got out in the street

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I really don't want to walk the streets carry a weapon and having to kill any dogs that attack me . 

    Snakes and rats are not aggressive  , they will ignore me if I ignore them .

  Dogs go on the attack for no reason , quite often in packs as well . 

I wouldn't say "dogs for on the attack for no reason." I think they have a reason. It might be terrirorial; it might be out of fear; it might be frustration driven by hunger. It's my opinion that dogs that are well fed and cared for don't go on the attack. But, as I've said here many times, I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to defend yourself against an aggressive and vicious dog. I'm saying you should not judge all soi dogs by a single or a few vicious ones and should not believe a remedy is to "kill them all." A better remedy would be for the neighborhood to "adopt them all.:
 

[billsmart]

3 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

There are plenty of reports of kids getting attacked by dogs so don't try to deflect from that. Humans killing other animals for whatever reason  is a completely different matter 

No, its not a different matter. Humans kill and kill and kill animals and plants all over the Earth. You're, at worst, complaining about a few dogs attacking humans in Bangkok (or wherever it is you live).

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, billsmart said:

"Inconvenience" is now being willing to share the territory with them. Many humans want the place they live to be free from all other life forms. They move into a place, tear down everything that's there, build their home, and then want all the animals they've displaced to just disappear, or they'll kill them. 

You send me all the reports of a four-year-old, or any other human, getting hurt by a dog, and I'll send you 1,000,000 times that amount of reports of humans killing other animals for convenience (defined above) or even just for fun.

You may be correct when presenting that argument with wild animals and habitats. 

 

But not about dogs....   Soi dogs were not in the habitat before humans, soi-dogs are here because humans feed them, they create a habitat for them - the argument you present in this circumstance is flawed. 

 

It is concerning that those who care for Soi dogs, that those who allow their own pets to roam the streets care less for the welfare of children in the area than they do these animals. 

 

Ultimately - there should be no ’stray soi dogs’... they are not wild animals hiding in the wilds of the forest, they are foraging the streets... 

Anyone with a pet dog should also be licensed to prove they have the time and the means to look after it well, to protect it, to ensure it cannot escape, to ensure its well excessed, well fed and healthy. 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, billsmart said:

I'm saying you should not judge all soi dogs by a single or a few vicious ones and should not believe a remedy is to "kill them all." A better remedy would be for the neighborhood to "adopt them all.:

If there are 1000 soi dogs on the streets and one of them may attack a child at some point in the future... I want all those 1000 soi dogs removed. 

 

Is the right of a child greater than that of a soi dog - I think so. 

[IvorBiggun2]

27 minutes ago, billsmart said:

You send me all the reports of a four-year-old, or any other human, getting hurt by a dog, and I'll send you 1,000,000 times that amount of reports of humans killing other animals for convenience (defined above) or even just for fun.

The first person ever to receive a face transplant was a French woman and the dog that did it was her own pet dog and it was a Labrador.

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, billsmart said:

I wouldn't say "dogs for on the attack for no reason." I think they have a reason. It might be terrirorial; it might be out of fear; it might be frustration driven by hunger. It's my opinion that dogs that are well fed and cared for don't go on the attack. But, as I've said here many times, I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to defend yourself against an aggressive and vicious dog. I'm saying you should not judge all soi dogs by a single or a few vicious ones and should not believe a remedy is to "kill them all." A better remedy would be for the neighborhood to "adopt them all.:
 

I disagree, dogs to attack and have attacked for no ‘apparent’ reason, the reason also becomes irrelevant when its the mail man or a child etc... 

 

I also disagree with your comment about defending ourself... No person, especially a child, should have to. 

 

The remedy is to not have stray dogs living in the same areas as humans, and any dogs that do live in the vicinity of humans are trained pets which are well looked after by responsible and caring owners. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

7 minutes ago, billsmart said:

No, its not a different matter. Humans kill and kill and kill animals 

There are animal cruelty laws to stop Humans killing animals .

If a Human behaved like the soi dogs , just wandering around attacking dogs for no reason, that person would face prosecution .

[billsmart]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

If there are 1000 soi dogs on the streets and one of them may attack a child at some point in the future... I want all those 1000 soi dogs removed. 

 

Is the right of a child greater than that of a soi dog - I think so. 

Thank you for clearly stating this problem.

You would remove 1000 dogs is only ONE of them MAY attack a child at some point in the future. Now, in your statement above, if by "remove" you mean "relocate them somewhere they could have a better life," then I'd think that would be something to consider, but still wouldn't agree wholeheartedly. The child could also be removed/relocated.

The bottom line is that a human's life is not worth more than a dog's life. Why would you think otherwise? 

 

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, billsmart said:

The child could also be removed/relocated.

The bottom line is that a human's life is not worth more than a dog's life. Why would you think otherwise? 

Do not feed the troll.    

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

I wrote:  The child could also be removed/relocated.
The bottom line is that a human's life is not worth more than a dog's life. Why would you think otherwise? 

 

Do not feed the troll.    

OvorBuggun2: I asked a question. Can you answer it? I asked why you think a human's life is worth more than a dog's life (or any other life)? 

 

If you can't answer that, all the arguments you've presented are worthless. 

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, billsmart said:

If you can't answer that, all the arguments you've presented are worthless. 

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, billsmart said:

Thank you for clearly stating this problem.

You would remove 1000 dogs is only ONE of them MAY attack a child at some point in the future. Now, in your statement above, if by "remove" you mean "relocate them somewhere they could have a better life," then I'd think that would be something to consider, but still wouldn't agree wholeheartedly.

I would prefer to relocate them humanely, but would that solution work ??? send them to the forests?> how many would survive that ?  

The solution of course is for the issue not to exist in the first place.

 

Had this issue of stray dogs been dealt with 20 years ago we wouldn’t be facing these issues now. 

 

1 minute ago, billsmart said:

The child could also be removed/relocated.

 

To where? where in Thailand doesn't have a soi dog problem.

 

This is the issue... the can just gets kicked down the road by those who think they are being humane. 

 

The reality is those who think they are caring towards soi dogs simply allow further generations of soi dogs to live as they do. 

 

This is why I suportied your ’spaying’ of the animals - IF all soi dogs could be spayed, the issue would be resolved - but is not the case. 

 

1 minute ago, billsmart said:

The bottom line is that a human's life is not worth more than a dog's life. Why would you think otherwise? 

A humans life is worth more than a dogs...  In my opinion anyway - we’re just going to have to disagree if you think a dog life is valued more than or equal to a humans.

 

The reality is that this should never come down to a choice. Poor decisions, poor planning, lack of action and weakness has led to generations of soi dogs suffering unnecessarily on the streets of Thailands towns and cities. 

 

10 years from now more generations of soi dogs will have suffered because there is no action now. 

Millions of dogs suffering mange and disease, scrounging for scraps in garbage bins etc.... is it humane to allow that to happen ????

 

 

 

[billd766]

22 hours ago, billd766 said:

I know that the owners are irresponsible, but how do you change their attitude? 

 

How many times do you have to step over or around soi dogs outside of the 7/11s?

On my school run this morning I only counted a dozen. 6 including the one on my drive were just outside on the road. I didn't recognise any of them as being local (the 10 or so houses either side).

 

They can't be after my dogs as I got the last 2 put down 6 or 7 years ago for eating my wife's ducks that she had bought 2 days earlier. The duck were the culmination of the problem as I live in rural Thailand and most of the houses used to have chickens.

 

A favourite food of soi dogs and a problem guaranteed to upset your neighbours. Soi dogs are not only on the streets but around peoples houses and gardens too, tipping bins over looking for food, crapping anywhere and everywhere. killing chickens and ducks and trying to savage people on scooters and motorbikes.

 

They are a pest and taking them off the streets and sterilising them and releasing them again does not fix the problem. There are millions of them across the country and the only way to fix that problem is to have all the soi and street dogs put down.

 

But who will do it and who will pay for it is a bigger problem?

[richard_smith237]

12 minutes ago, billsmart said:

The bottom line is that a human's life is not worth more than a dog's life. Why would you think otherwise? 

We, as humans, or most of us anyway, are ‘species-ist’....  we value other human life over dogs... we value dogs over most other mammals and we value mammals over other species. 

 

Why is a dogs life valued more than that of a mouse ?... why a dogs life valued more than that of a fish ???

 

 

[Don Dunkelblum]

Shoot them all

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

They can't be after my dogs as I got the last 2 put down

How did you get your dogs put down? There isn't a vet around here that will put a dog down. My last one died in agony due to his belief in Buddhism.

[billd766]

5 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

How did you get your dogs put down? There isn't a vet around here that will put a dog down. My last one died in agony due to his belief in Buddhism.

I prefer not to say, but there was a gun involved (not ours) and as you say, no Thai vets will do anything even if the animal is/was in great pain.

[Boomer6969]

On 9/5/2022 at 5:56 PM, billsmart said:

You're invading their turf. Don't ever forget that. 

You are ridiculous... 

[richard_smith237]

9 minutes ago, billsmart said:

Yes! You're correct! I call that "hubris" and it is the topic of my recent book, The Icarus Syndrome.

 

And, yes, we also value other life in a manner that is somewhat equivalent to how close it is to our own. I've attached an image of that I used in the book.

Hubris is what is causing humans to destroy the environment on this planet, and the "soi dogs problem" is just one small example of that. ????

The greater point you address is far more significant and multifaceted than the simple issue of soi dogs. 

 

Soi dogs should not be there, like rats they are vermin. 

 

They are not like other animals and species needed for the benefit of the ecosystem and environment. 

 

Soi dogs only exist because we do, they would not thrive without us. 

 

They are stray pseudo domesticated animals and should not be free to roam areas where they may cause harm to people - this specific issue has a solution, the solution is black and white, the problem is black and white... 

 

This is a very different discussion to that of the importance of animals in the ecosystem and the impact mankind has on that ecosystem - overlapping the two is an attempt to muddy some very simple waters. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bday Prang]

54 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

The first person ever to receive a face transplant was a French woman and the dog that did it was her own pet dog and it was a Labrador.

Labradors feature quite a lot in dog on human attacks, more so than pit bulls 

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

Soi dogs should not be there, like rats they are vermin. 

 

They are not like other animals and species needed for the benefit of the ecosystem and environment. 

 

What you say above is more accurate is you replace "soi dogs" with "humans." We are the real "vermin" and cancer that is destroying all life on this planet.

[Bday Prang]

33 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

We, as humans, or most of us anyway, are ‘species-ist’....  we value other human life over dogs... we value dogs over most other mammals and we value mammals over other species. 

 

Why is a dogs life valued more than that of a mouse ?... why a dogs life valued more than that of a fish ???

 

 

Speak for yourself , I certainly don't value dogs above any other mammals, fish  or any other species for that matter. 

 

[Bday Prang]

4 minutes ago, billsmart said:

What you say above is more accurate is you replace "soi dogs" with "humans." We are the real "vermin" and cancer that is destroying all life on this planet.

Now you are starting to sound ridiculous, have you thought of joining "extinction rebellion" or another of those crackpot organisations

[IvorBiggun2]

10 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

Labradors feature quite a lot in dog on human attacks, more so than pit bulls 

Thanks for that. I'm a lover of Pitbulls and I've never come across a nasty one. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 minute ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Thanks for that. I'm a lover of Pitbulls and I've never come across a nasty one. 

How many times have you heard

  " We are shocked, he doesn't usually behave like that , he's always gotton on well with kids"

[IvorBiggun2]

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

" We are shocked, he doesn't usually behave like that

The family of the French woman said that about her Labrador.

[Bday Prang]

50 minutes ago, billsmart said:

OvorBuggun2: I asked a question. Can you answer it? I asked why you think a human's life is worth more than a dog's life (or any other life)? 

 

If you can't answer that, all the arguments you've presented are worthless. 

I'll answer it for him , and I'll try to keep it simple for you   The reason a human life is worth more than a dogs is because there is  a lot more invested  in the life of human,   than in the worthless existence of a wild dog.  A father getting mauled to death for example deprives a family of financial support , A child getting ripped apart deprives parents of all they invested in that child's life and deprives the world of any potential that child had.  The death of a wild dog is no loss to anybody in fact its a double bonus as it guarantees no further attacks are possible and no further offspring will be born

[Gottfrid]

4 hours ago, billsmart said:

Or do that and have it shoved up your ass.

 

4 hours ago, billsmart said:

I say there should be a bounty or at least an open season on those that go around and shoot stray dogs. 

Looking at your handle, and comparing that to your comments is as looking at a bill missing the smart code.

[EricTh]

3 hours ago, billsmart said:

Female dogs, if they are spayed, are not of interest to either male or other female dogs. They are not subject to either male sexual advances or other females seeking dominance. That's been my experience with the dogs I have, anyway.

I am curious, why is that so? How do male dogs know whether a female dog is spayed or not to lose sexual interest on them?

 

 

[richard_smith237]

7 minutes ago, EricTh said:

I am curious, why is that so? How do male dogs know whether a female dog is spayed or not to lose sexual interest on them?

Its not like going to Nana Plaza 

 

Female dogs which are spayed do not ‘go into heat’....  

Male dogs are not interested in female dogs which are 'not in heat’....